| Title |
Is There a Gold Standard for TKA Tibial Component Rotational Alignment?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11999-013-2822-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erin E. Hutter, Jeffrey F. Granger, Matthew D. Beal, Robert A. Siston |
| Abstract |
Joint function and durability after TKA depends on many factors, but component alignment is particularly important. Although the transepicondylar axis is regarded as the gold standard for rotationally aligning the femoral component, various techniques exist for tibial component rotational alignment. The impact of this variability on joint kinematics and stability is unknown. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 86 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 17% |
| Researcher | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 21 | 24% |
| Unknown | 14 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 53% |
| Engineering | 7 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 20 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2013.
All research outputs
#16,199,888
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#5,171
of 7,318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,785
of 293,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#75
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 293,499 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.